Who else agrees that Civ 5 has been dumbed down?

[KingYosef]

Don't forget to vote on the other poll... http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94311

UPDATE ON POLL (9/25): As you can see, more than 1 in every 4 players think that Civ 5 has been dumb down. Numbers don't lie, this release is below Civ par.
UPDATE ON POLL (9/27): Now the numbers continue to rise as 33 percent - 1 in every 3 players agree that Civ 5 has been dumb down, while 11 percent are uncertain.
UPDATE ON POLL (9/28): The numbers continues to rise for those who believe that Civ 5 has been dumb down to a now 37 percent. Undecided still sits at 11 percent, while 52 percent are opposed.
UPDATE ON POLL (9/30): With the numbers still rising, now 40 percent of users think that Civ 5 has been dumb down with roughly ten percent undecided! That means only 1 in 2 users actually think there is no dumbing down of the Civ 5 game! Have us skeptics been wrong? Or is it only a matter of time before one realizes that the game is dumb down?
UPDATE ON POLL (10/1): Yes, you guessed it! The numbers continue to even out for those who think the game has been dumb down, which now sits at 41.19 percent. The number of undecided is at 10.18%, while those who don't think it has been dumb down now drops below the 50 percent mark to 48.63%. At this rate the majority will think the game has been dumb down will even with the opposite view in less than a week. Stay tuned...
UPDATE ON POLL (10/3): The trend continues as it has been over a week now since Civ 5 has been released and the poll numbers are showing that users continue to agree that Civ 5 has been dumbed down. Out of a 1,045 voters, 44.31% now agree that Civ 5 has been dumbed down, while the declining 45.36% disagree. The number undecided holds steady at 10.33%.
UPDATE ON POLL (10/5): Well, we saw this coming. Now the majority of voters at 45.23% agree that Civ 5 has in fact been dumbed down. Those that disagree sit at 44.90%, while undecided declines also to 9.88%.
UPDATE ON POLL (10/7): Here is the most recent poll results; Yes - 47.19%, No - 43.35%, Undecided - 9.45%
That is less than 3% needed to take the majority, more than 50%, who agree that Civ 5 has been dumbed down.
UPDATE ON POLL (10/9): The trend continues in favor of Civ 5 being dumbed down... Yes - 48.78%, No - 41.96%, Undecided - 9.26%, Out of 1,480 Voters
UPDATE ON POLL (10/11): The results now showing a Majority of 50.03% agree that Civ 5 has been dumbed down, while those who disagree at 41.02%. Undecided now sits at 8.95%. Out of 1,565 voters.


1. I have always felt like I have been in control while playing the Civ game. Civ 5 has me feeling like someone is holding my hand throughout the whole game as I'm being fed a choose your own adventure bedtime story. I just found myself hitting the next turn button without much to focus on or manage. Very disappointing.

2. Don't like the city states, or atleast how they are implemented too much into the game. They are just annoying and uninteresting.

3. Bring back religion. They should have just improved on this feature instead of omitting it. Omitting religion from Civ is like omitting the egg in an omelet.

4. They took away almost all the great features. I'm talking about: vassal states, tech trading, map trading, diplomacy, espionage, religion, health/sickness, random events, scenarios, wonder animations, end-game cinematics, and culture, research, and commerce sliders. This is just the ones that I can recall off the top of my head.

5. Also, civics. Now civics has merely become a ladder of perks that you upgrade. Has absolutely no flexibility. These are features that kept your mind buzzing as your culture advances into each era. If I want a barbaric Civ I can choose so... at any time I wish and any point in the game.

In conclusion, I'll be setting this game on the shelf and hoping for a big change. As for now, I can just go and play my PS3 and get the same feeling from a console game. Also, those who want to flame me, yes I understand that this is just a release of the game, and I do understand how Civ 4 was when it was released. I have made my opinion in light of that knowledge.

[godotnut]

It certainly seems dumbed down a bit to me based on my experience so far, but I have a hard time remembering how I felt about Civ4 when it first came out. Even worse than the "dumbed down" aspect to me tho are the many problems with basic gameplay, such as the lack of a "workers leave old improvements" option and an idiotic AI.

[Lanstro]

Too early to tell. Civ4 had a great balance between food, hammers, commerce, happiness, health, diplomacy and military strength (though food -> hammers through slavery was a little broken). Lots of levers to pull, several 'sweet spots' balancing all those levers, allowing several different types of strategies, which made it very interesting.

Civ5 seems to have gold and happiness as the overriding levers, with the minor levers being culture, military strength and diplomacy. Definitely a different dynamic, and too early to tell whether there's just one 'sweet spot' between them (which would make it a very shallow game once 'solved'), or, like civ4, there are several alternate ones that suit different strategies.

[Grapa]

No. Please grow a brain, thank you.

Moderator Action: please do not flame other users.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/faq.php?faq=updated_rules_2011

[dannythefool]

I picked "no" because I also play CivRev and I know a dumbed-down Civ game when I see one...

[Apoll]

Having played one of the best (my 5th) games yesterday on the Demo (ticking for tonight) I must say the game hasn't become simple. On the contrary more complicated.

Why I say that? (Omit religion for a second.)

On CIV 4, when you want to declare war mass a force and attack.
You take one by one the enemy cities, waiting the 4-5 turns to turn them in the process and as long as you have money flowing no worries. You can easily take out a HUGE empire, many times the size of ours with not that much of an issue.

Also by the time a city turns to you, they can start producing an army. Especially at the start, they can easily provide you with low units like archers and swordsmen, without worrying about anything else.

On Civ 5, yeah right. Try it. Last night I played with Egypt (Prince). I took out Greece without much trouble on turn 45. However to wage war against the rest was a steep uphill.
First, you need money.
Second you need happiness, and having unhappy citizens, cripples your army. For each unhappy citizen the army gets a penatly of 3%. So taking out three cities, and can easily half your army capabilities before these cities, have any luxury or building access.

However if you want to keep the war, you cannot build workers or monuments or buildings or settlers to go closer a luxury.
Also the captured cities are dead slow to produce, and they take a big efford to capture too because of how the new combat system works.

As for the city states, as long as what they are asking, isn't on my way (eg an barbarian to take out), I just ignore them. At strength 24 it will need more than 100 turns research to take them out

So I do love the new Civ, is more challenging and I bet someone will come out with a religion mod, or maybe DLC?

[squadbroken]

Originally Posted by Lanstro

though food -> hammers through slavery was a little broken

A little broken? That's the understatement of the year.

[Minmaster]

maybe they're gonna port it to the consoles.... and wanted to do minimal work

[~Bamboo~]

Originally Posted by dannythefool

I picked "no" because I also play CivRev and I know a dumbed-down Civ game when I see one...

lol


I picked yes. The new combat model is interesting. The rest is putting me to sleep. I was never this bored with vanilla Civ4.

[KingYosef]

That's just it, instead of having to go and manage your cities like in previous Civ games, this one pushes you in a certain direction. It's become a choose your own adventure, instead of what should be create your own adventure.

[HannibalBarca]

Originally Posted by ~Bamboo~

I picked yes. The new combat model is interesting. The rest is putting me to sleep. I was never this bored with vanilla Civ4.

Quoted for Truth

[PawelS]

Again

[DashieBaby87]

No way (Voted 'no'). Imo, they got rid of some of the useless features and bad kinks in Civ IV, and added more to this game. I like it!

♥

[devilhunterred]

No culture, research and commerce sliders.

No civics. Now civics is merely a ladder of perks that you upgrade. Has absolutely no flexibility.

No vasal states.

No religions.

No hamlets that can upgrade, instead we get this absurd "trading post".

No health/sickness.

No espionage.

Culture, commerce and productions are now separate entities.

No random events.

Leaders have no personality traits. Only one leader per nation.

No scenarios.

No wonder animations. No end-game cinematics.



Calling it dumbed down is an understatement.

Don't be fooled, people, Vanilla CIV5 this is not. This is plainer than Vanilla, this is CIV5 Incomplete.

[BoydofZINJ]

I just want BETTER wonders ... wonders that are more wonderous. More impact on the Religion. And MORE EFFEN LEADERS. WTF. How many leaders did we get... 7 ? WHAT THE F IS UP WITH SO FEW LEADERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Someone mentioned there was no Random Events. I forgot about that. FRAK ME! NO RANDOM EVENTS. The main guy working on the game was a "hero" of the old republic and was a gamer, or what ever. FIRE HIM. Fire him twice, if you can.

[BoydofZINJ]

Fire the main developer and start from scratch. Fire him twice if you can!

[Grotius]

Not at all dumbed down. In some ways, more complex. City-states add an interesting new layer to everything -- diplomacy, military, economics (through sharing of food and resources), and (to a lesser extent) culture. Social policies give us a whole second tech tree -- I love it. Moreover, we can't possibly research every tech in this tree, so there are lots of interesting new decisions. Maintenance costs make me think harder about what buildings to build and where, and they tend to require one to specialize one's cities. I can't just spam roads mindlessly, either. Personally, I think global happiness makes for harder decisions, not easier ones. And of course combat is significantly more complex now.

Yes, a couple things have been eliminated or simplified, but they don't outweigh the above additions. I did enjoy religion in Civ 4, and I hope it makes a comeback in an expansion. But I don't really miss "health" and the health-related resources.

In my view, the new additions and complexities outweigh the things that have been simplified or removed.

[digitalcraft]

Originally Posted by devilhunterred

No culture, research and commerce sliders.

No civics. Now civics is merely a ladder of perks that you upgrade. Has absolutely no flexibility.

No vasal states.

No religions.

No hamlets that can upgrade, instead we get this absurd "trading post".

No health/sickness.

No espionage.

Culture, commerce and productions are now separate entities.

No random events.

Leaders have no personality traits. Only one leader per nation.

No scenarios.

No wonder animations. No end-game cinematics.



Calling it dumbed down is an understatement.

Don't be fooled, people, Vanilla CIV5 this is not. This is plainer than Vanilla, this is CIV5 Incomplete.

And some people are claiming Civ 5 is more complex I think they just think "people claim Civ 4 is more complex, therefore complex is good. I'm on the side that wins if Civ 5 is best so I will say its more complex!"

[civhawaii]

It is dumbed down a bit. Honestly I dont think this release even warrants a new roman numeral. More like an updated UI version with features removed.

It just feels unfinished, I mean cmon my pyramids are in the middle of the ocean and sometimes I get these weird red spots on my hexes.

Biggest Civ fan ever, but this was disappointing, especially after how excited I was to grab it.

[tom2050]

It's not dumbed down if you just got done playing an FPS console game, but depending on what you are comparing it to, it seems a bit on 'graphics were emphasized over the large majortiy of the game'. Very few major additions... Alot of concepts were deleted, and the rest is stuff that is oh so similar with minor alterations. To me, it seems that gameplay concepts weren't given the top priority, with the only exception being combat, which the AI isn't good at; therefore the 'New AI' isn't even a talking point anymore.

Research is extremely fast compared to construction time in the beginning. Beginning just isn't fun constantly hitting the end turn button. Research 7 techs in the same time only being able to build a few units is just odd. It only starts to get interesting further down the road.

All in all, seems graphically bloated and gameplay depleted. A better medium would have been preferred for this type of game.